PDA

View Full Version : Steelers Should Have Franchised Taylor, Not Woodley



stillers4me
03-17-2011, 05:11 AM
In previous offseasons, the Steelers’ decision to place their franchise tag on 26-year-old, star outside linebacker LaMarr Woodley would have been a no-brainer. After all, a young stud in his prime who tends to play his best in the postseason like Woodley would undoubtedly command a huge payday as an unrestricted free agent.

But this is not a normal offseason and the Steelers may have badly misread the labor strife by franchising Woodley and not veteran cornerback Ike Taylor, possibly destroying their Super Bowl hopes for next season in the process. Now it appears that Woodley would never have had an opportunity to be an unrestricted free agent this year, while Taylor is going to be among the most coveted players who could be granted immediate, unrestricted free agency by the court system in the next couple months.......................

read more @ http://www.steelerslounge.com/2011/03/steelers-franchised-taylor-woodley/

HometownGal
03-17-2011, 08:11 AM
Unfortunately, what's done is done. Hopefully the Steelers will find a way to hold onto Ike. As I've said in other threads, I just can't imagine him not wearing the black 'n gold. :horror:

shinoff2183
03-17-2011, 09:16 AM
I dont think ikes as good as some make him out to be. Ive seen him get burnt or beat as much as gay. Atleast gays fumble recovery got us to the SB. What did Ike do? Hes been beat as much as any CB on our roster.

wvsportsman
03-17-2011, 02:19 PM
I dont think ikes as good as some make him out to be. Ive seen him get burnt or beat as much as gay. Atleast gays fumble recovery got us to the SB. What did Ike do? Hes been beat as much as any CB on our roster.

I agree with you to a point. But he is the best we have at that position, and really think we need to find a way to keep him and upgrade on the other side
and that may elevate his level of play. I do wish he could learn to hang on to the ball.

HometownGal
03-17-2011, 02:37 PM
I dont think ikes as good as some make him out to be. Ive seen him get burnt or beat as much as gay. Atleast gays fumble recovery got us to the SB. What did Ike do? Hes been beat as much as any CB on our roster.

What did Ike do? He successfully (most times) covered the top receivers on each team we've faced that's what he's done. Yes - he's been beat here and there but name me a corner in the NFL who hasn't.

Count Steeler
03-17-2011, 04:19 PM
What did Ike do? He successfully (most times) covered the top receivers on each team we've faced that's what he's done. Yes - he's been beat here and there but name me a corner in the NFL who hasn't.

Every corner that has faced the Bruce Arians run offense of the Pittsburgh Steelers. Opposing corners never get beat. :)

And YOU KNOW who's fault that is... hehehe.

86WARD
03-17-2011, 07:03 PM
Nah...they did it right.

Iron Steeler
03-17-2011, 07:38 PM
Not worried...

GBMelBlount
03-17-2011, 08:20 PM
Ike is very good and a very good point is made here.

SMR
03-20-2011, 07:41 PM
You just can't franchise everyone. The Steelers just have so many good players. A good problem, actually lol.

steelerdude15
03-20-2011, 11:00 PM
Losing Ike would certainly hurt us in the secondary. He's our best corner, but he is only an average corner in the NFL. If we do lose him to free agency, the Steelers have to draft a corner in the first round.

solardave
03-21-2011, 01:12 AM
I agree Ike is OUR best corner I also think he is not a franchise type corner. One of the young CBs will have to step up if we lose him. I don't see Ike getting a lot of attention (like Namdi) in free agency.

SteelGhost
03-21-2011, 01:00 PM
Maybe the FO has something in mind to retain Ike that we don't know and the tag went to Woodley :noidea:

zulater
03-24-2011, 06:00 AM
I just wonder which teams are going to be lining up to give Ike a ton of money? By NFL standards Ike's old, he had a horrible season in 2009, he was pretty good last year, but he's not nearly as consistent as he was from 04-08. Plus Ike takes some bad penalties that can kill a team. And not just PI calls, he tends to mouth off a lot and hit after the whistle. If it wasn't such a bad position for the Steelers they probably would be giving little thought to retaining Ike. Anyway as it is I'm not sure there's any team out there that's really willing to raise the roof for Ike. It wouldn't surprise me much if the Steelers turned out to be his best option anyway.

The Duke
03-24-2011, 06:15 AM
I just wonder which teams are going to be lining up to give Ike a ton of money? By NFL standards Ike's old, he had a horrible season in 2009, he was pretty good last year, but he's not nearly as consistent as he was from 04-08. Plus Ike takes some bad penalties that can kill a team. And not just OPI calls, he tends to mouth off a lot and hit after the whistle. If it wasn't such a bad position for the Steelers they probably would be giving little thought to retaining Ike. Anyway as it is I'm not sure there's any team out there that's really willing to raise the roof for Ike. It wouldn't surprise me much if the Steelers turned out to be his best option anyway.

really? Ike's pretty fast and the raiders are more than likely gonna lose asomugha. I can see that happening easily

hope not though. Hopefully he's just testing to see what he can get like clark last year

86WARD
03-24-2011, 08:19 AM
Like I said. It was done correctly.

Psycho Ward 86
03-24-2011, 05:41 PM
I dont think ikes as good as some make him out to be. Ive seen him get burnt or beat as much as gay. Atleast gays fumble recovery got us to the SB. What did Ike do? Hes been beat as much as any CB on our roster.

That is just a blatantly horrible observation. Unless you were only talking about 2009.

steelreserve
03-24-2011, 11:01 PM
I am still just mystified as to why we didn't use the tranny tag on him. Or use it on Woodley and use the franchise on Ike.

Woodley we could deal with replacing if someone signed him and we got a draft pick. Taylor, not so much; corners don't usually make an impact for a couple years.

Couldn't we have also made Woodley an RFA, under either version of the labor agreement?